>
> No, not demanding anything. Requesting it as a feature. While your
> design has a very crucial use-case of constant checkpointing, there is
>
> also a use-case to *suspend* checkpointing (or enable it on demand
> only). As mentioned in my previous example, when restoring to a
> filesystem, or even installing new software, it is extremely unlikely
> that you would want a to go back to a point *inbetween* the time you
>
> started the install/restore to the time it completed. Say for example
> you are installing a new version of Openoffice which installs
>
> home:/opt/openoffice.org$ find . ! -type d |wc -l
>
> 4100
>
> 4000 odd files. For sure if the software didn't work, crashed, was
> buggy, i would go back completely to the pre-install state and would
> never need any intervening checkpoint. In this case i would suspend
>
> checkpointing before installing (which may by default create a
> snapshot), and then i'd restart the constant checkpointing after i'd
> finished the install/restore. Please note, i am not comparing nilfs to
> zfs, but zfs doesn't have constant cp (i think) but does have the
>
> feature i mention, i.e you take snapshots when needed (perhaps via a
> cron job daily, monthly, weekly)
>
> I just want to give my though on this one, keeping checkpoints as-is seems
ideal to me, in this case you have a very granular way to go back in time,
however, what you say is right, when installing a new software for example,
it's nice to have a way to get back to it, I guess in this case you would
just convert the last checkpoint to snapshot before the installation so you
have a time mark of where to rollback (and of course have a steady state
which won't go away during the installation), right?
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to